Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.42 seconds)The Hindu Succession Act, 1956
State Of Maharashtra vs Narayan Rao Sham Rao Deshmukh & Ors on 19 March, 1985
"10.We have carefully considered the above decision and we feel that
this case has to be treated as an authority for the position that when a
female member who inherits an interest in the joint family property under
Section 6 of the Act files a suit for partition expressing her willingness to
go out of the family she would be entitled to get both the interest she has
inherited and the share which would have been notionally allotted to her, as
stated in Explanation I to Section 6 of the Act. But it cannot be an
authority for the proposition that she ceases to be a member of the family on
the death of a male member of the family whose interest in the family property
devolves on her without her volition to separate herself from the family. A
legal legal fiction should no doubt ordinarily be carried to its logical end
to carry out the purposes for which it is enacted but it cannot be carried
beyond that. It is no doubt true that the right of a female heir to the
interest inherited by her in the family property gets fixed on the death of a
male member under Section 6 of the Act but she cannot be treated as having
ceased to be a member of the family without her volition as otherwise it will
lead to strange results which could not have been in the contemplation of
Parliament when it enacted that provision and which might also not be in the
interest of such female heirs. To illustrate, if what is being asserted is
accepted as correct it may result in the wife automatically being separated
from her husband when one of her sons dies leaving her behind as his heir.
Such a result does not follow from the language of the statute. In such an
event she should have the option to separate herself or to continue in the
family as long as she wishes as its member though she has acquired an
indefeasible interest in a specific share of the family property which would
remain undiminished whatever may be the subsequent changes in the composition
of the membership of the family............... It should, therefore, be held
that notwithstanding the death of Sham Rao the remaining members of the family
continued to hold the family properties together though the individual
interest of the female members thereof in the family properties had become
fixed."
Thamma Venkata Subbamma (Dead) By L.R vs Thamma Rattamma & Ors on 6 May, 1987
(2)In Thamma Venkata Subbamma (dead) by L.R. vs. Thamma Rattamma &
others (100 L.W. 1125), the Apex Court laid down as follows.
Section 100 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
1